seeker242 wrote:Things like this always remind me of Verse 50 of The Dhammapada.

50. "Let none find fault with others; let none see the omissions and commissions of others. But let one see one's own acts, done and undone."

I assume, seeker, this is in reference to my post because I came on very strong (although I may be wrong). However, I have looked at my own actions done, and undone. When I was a bhikkhu I lived very, very purely - mind you, not completely without fault, but I never accepted or used money and only committed very minor . Now I understand that i was only a bhikkhu for six weeks, but that six weeks was very valuable and helped lead not to the shortening of the dispensation, like the careers of monks who use money and commit other offences do.

We have to understand that it's OK to speak up about things that are bad for the Dhamma. IF someone does something bad, it is OK to reprimand them and so forth.

“Should one see a wise man, who, like a revealer of treasure, points out faults and reproves; let one associate with such a wise person; it will be better, not worse, for him who associates with such a one. 76

“Let him advise, instruct, and dissuade one from evil;truly pleasing is he to the good, displeasing is he to the bad.”77

But Maniculaka the village headman was unable to convince that assembly.

Then Maniculaka the village headman went to the Blessed One, and having approached the Blessed One bowed to him and sat down at one side. While sitting at one side Maniculaka the village headman said to the Blessed One:

`Venerable Sir, in the king´s palace the king´s retinue were assembled... (He repeated all that had been said above.)... But Venerable Sir, I was not able to convince that assembly.

`Venerable Sir, by thus explaining am I one who speaks what is said by the Blessed One or have I falsely misrepresented the Blessed One? Have I answered in accordance with this Teaching or would someone speaking in accordance with this Teaching find reason to blame me?´

(The Blessed One:) `Truly you, headman, by thus explaining are one who speaks what is said by me and did not falsely misrepresent me. You have answered in accordance with this Teaching and someone speaking in accordance with this Teaching would not find reason to blame you.

`For, headman, gold, silver, and money are not allowable for those monks who are the sons of the Sakyan prince. Those monks who are the sons of the Sakyan prince do not consent to gold, silver, or money. Those monks who are the sons of the Sakyan prince do not accept gold, silver, or money. Those monks who are the sons of the Sakyan prince have renounced gold and gems and are without money.

`Headman, for whoever gold, silver, or money are allowable then for him the five types of sense pleasure are allowable. For whoever the five types of sense pleasure are allowable you can be certain, "He does not possess the nature of a monk, he does not possess the nature of a son of the Sakyan prince."

seeker242 wrote:Things like this always remind me of Verse 50 of The Dhammapada.

50. "Let none find fault with others; let none see the omissions and commissions of others. But let one see one's own acts, done and undone."

I assume, seeker, this is in reference to my post because I came on very strong (although I may be wrong).

No, It was just my random thought on the subject as a whole.

We have to understand that it's OK to speak up about things that are bad for the Dhamma. IF someone does something bad, it is OK to reprimand them and so forth.

Yes, please see below too though.

Bhikkhu Pesala wrote:That is always a good verse to remember, but don't overlook the rest, e.g.

“Should one see a wise man, who, like a revealer of treasure, points out faults and reproves; let one associate with such a wise person; it will be better, not worse, for him who associates with such a one. 76

“Let him advise, instruct, and dissuade one from evil;truly pleasing is he to the good, displeasing is he to the bad.”77

I agree with both of the above! But at the same time if there is a person who has done bad and that person is not here, then you are not really reprimanding them but rather just talking about reprimanding them and just talking about their bad thing they have done. This is dangerous territory IMO! Because it can, although not necessarily, lead your mind towards ill will and away from metta. Sometimes unknowingly if you are not careful about it.

I think it's important to be mindful of the fact that this kind of attention, attention on others faults, has the potential to lead the mind away from metta. Like the OP has said "I don't much like "hearing" myself think such snide remarks; I really don't like being overly critical." If putting your mind on others faults causes your mind to become disturbed or upset, if it leads it away from metta, then one could argue this kind of attention is not "appropriate attention" because putting your attention on that has no real benefit but only negative effects. If putting your attention on it has no benefit but only negative effects, then what is the point of doing that? Of course this is not always the case but it can be.

Verse 76 and 77 are good too! But I can't help but think In verse 76 the wise man is talking directly to the person who has done bad, not talking about them, but to them. The same with 77. I just think it's important to be mindful of the fact that attention on others faults can, sometimes unknowingly, turn into something that is not beneficial rather than something that is beneficial. Of course this is not necessarily the case but the potential is there depending on the person. Focusing one's attention on others faults can be dangerous territory for one's own peace and wellbeing! But of course you all probably know all that already.

seeker242 wrote: But at the same time if there is a person who has done bad and that person is not here, then you are not really reprimanding them but rather just talking about reprimanding them and just talking about their bad thing they have done. This is dangerous territory IMO! Because it can, although not necessarily, lead your mind towards ill will and away from metta. Sometimes unknowingly if you are not careful about it.

I think it's important to be mindful of the fact that this kind of attention, attention on others faults, has the potential to lead the mind away from metta. Like the OP has said "I don't much like "hearing" myself think such snide remarks; I really don't like being overly critical." If putting your mind on others faults causes your mind to become disturbed or upset, if it leads it away from metta, then one could argue this kind of attention is not "appropriate attention" because putting your attention on that has no real benefit but only negative effects. If putting your attention on it has no benefit but only negative effects, then what is the point of doing that? Of course this is not always the case but it can be.

Good points seeker, but I have metta for the monks spoken about and metta for everyone here who will read this thread and possiblty be able to straighten out their views about monks and their using money.

Your point about metta is valid, but only we can know our own mind (know when there is metta or not).

I wish to write more but I have to go now. I will try to write more later.